About your Search

20121002
20121010
STATION
MSNBC 25
MSNBCW 25
CNN 17
CSPAN 17
CNNW 16
CSPAN2 11
WHUT (Howard University Television) 7
WETA 6
FBC 5
CNBC 4
KQED (PBS) 4
KQEH (PBS) 3
KRCB (PBS) 3
( more )
LANGUAGE
English 182
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 182 (some duplicates have been removed)
're going. governor romney has a perspective that says if we cut taxes, skewed towards the wealthy ad roll back regulation, we'll be better off. i have a different view. i think we have to invest in education and training. i think it's important for us to develop new sources of energy here in america. that we change our tax code to make sure that we're helping small businesses and companies that are investing in the united states. that we take some of the money that we're saving as we wind down two wars, to rebuild america. and that we reduce our deficit in a balanced way that allows us to make critical investments. now, ultimately it will be up to the voters, to you, which path we should take. are we going to double down on the top down economic policies that helped get us into this mess? or do we embrace a new economic patriotism, that says america does best when the middle class does best? i'm looking forward to having that debate. >> governor romney, two minutes. >> thank you, jim. an honor to be with you and pleased to be with the president. i'm pleased to be at the university of denv
romney has a perspective that says if we cut taxes, skewed towards the wealthy and roll back regulations, that we'll be better off. i have a different view. i think we have got to invest in education and training. i think it's important for us to develop new sources of energy here in america. that we change our tax code to make sure we're helping small businesses and companies here in the united states, that we take some of the money we're saving as we wind down two wars to rebuild america. now it ultimately is going to be up to the voters to you, which path we should take. are we going to double down on the top-down economic policies that helped get us into this mess, or embrace a new economic patriotism, that says america does best when the middle class does best. >> governor romney two minutes. >> romney: thing you jim. i'm i'm -- pleased to be here with the president and to be here. and congratulations to you, mr. president, i'm sure this is the most romantic place you could imagine here with me. [ laughter ] >> romney: i have had the occasion of meet
and your taxes. >> unlike president obama, i will not raise tax on the middle class of america. >> i want to reform the tax code so it's simple, fair. >> the candidates' opinions couldn't be more different and the stakes couldn't be higher. >> their philosophy is if you don't are health insurance, don't get sick. >> now is the moment we can do something. and with your help, we will do something. >> cnbc's coverage of the first presidential debate of the 2012 presidential election begins now. >> tonight some of the most influential figures in the nation on the economy join us here on cnbc. >> we've got representative and hopeful ron paul with us. texas, from texas. he is of course outspoken about the federal reserve policies. robert reich is here with us tonight. also with us grover norquist. the man behind the no new taxes pledge so many republicans made. and bob lutz a former top auto executive. the auto bailout expected to be a big topic tonight. and we've got president of the aflcio. unions of course a major constituency. and roger altman. as you can see the lineup card is full. going
that if we roll back regulations and cut back taxes, well, we will be better off. i have a different view. it is important to develop new sources of energy here in+ america, that we change our tax code to make sure we are helping small businesses and companies investing here in the united states, that we take some of the money we are setting as we wind down two wars, to rebuild america, and we reduce our deficit in a balanced way that allows us to make these critical investments. ultimately it's up to the voters, to you, which path we should take. are we going to double down on the top-down economic policies that help us get into this mess, or do we embrace america doing best when the middle-class. >> of trichet the chance to be here with the president and be at the university of denver -- i appreciate the chance to be here with the president. congratulations to you, mr. president, under anniversary. i am sure this is the most romantic place you can imagine being, here with me. i have had the occasion of the last couple of years in meeting people across the country. i was in dayton, ohio,
. >> i will not raise taxes on middle-income americans. >> the debates will matter to some undecided voters. >> the debates could decide the election for either one of us. >> from denver, colorado, here is scott pelley. >> pelley: good evening. we're about to see the one thing we haven't seen in this long campaign for the presidency-- the candidates side by side. it's the first of three debates between the democratic incumbent-- 51-year-old barack obama-- and his republican challenger 65-year-old mitt romney. it comes 34 days before the election-- though early voting is already under way in many states. the focus tonight is domestic issues, including the economy, still struggling to recover from the great recession. polls show the race is very close nationally, but in swing states that will tip the balance, the president is ahead. so he'll be trying to protect his lead and for mitt romney, it's an opportunity for a breakout moment. in front of what could be the biggest audience he will have before election day. the sole questioner tonight is jim lehrer. it's the 12th time he's served
a perspective that says if we cut taxes skew toward the wealthy and roll back regulations we will be better off. i have a different view. we have to invest in education and training. it is important to develop new sources of and in america, change our tax code to help small businesses and companies investing in the united states. that we take some of the money that we are seeing -- saving to robo-call america -- rebuild america. it will be up to the voters was path we should take. will we double down on the top- down economic policies that helped get us into this mess or embrace a new economic patriotism that says america does best when the middle class does best. i will forward to having that debate. >> it is in honor to be here with you. i appreciate the chance to be with the president. congratulations to you mr. president on your anniversary. i am sure this is the most romantic place you could imagines here with me. congratulations. this is a tender topic. i have met people across the country. i was in dayton, ohio and a woman said i have been out of work since may. can you help me? yesterda
more, taxing more, regulating more, if you will, trickle down government would work. >> president obama sounded a familiar alarm. warning of romney's been there done that economics. >> the approach that governor romney is talking about is the same sales pitch that was made in 2001 and 2003. we ended up with the slowest job growth in 50 years. >> whether it was health care, jobs, or medicare, it was romney who stood out for his aggressive ste. >> i just don't know how the president could have come into office facing 23 million people out of work, rising unemployment, an economic crisis at the kitchen table, and spend his energy and passion for two years fighting for obama care. >> the president made his points in a slower, more laid back, often looking down, sometimes appearing disengaged. it's not that he didn't try to rip apart romney's economic plan. >> that kind of top-down economics where folks at the top are doing well, so the average person making $3 million is getting a $250,000 tax break while middle class families are burdened further. >> romney was determined to go toe to toe.
knows taxes are due on april 15. we set up tax centers on the base three months prior and we take active duty military personnel off their regular duties and they go in and assist people with their taxes. you have people assisting with federal and state taxes. we provide nothing of the sort for voting registration. the move act was supposed to get offices set up on the basis. everybody could have gone in to check in with that voting assistance officer. that has never been in place while we were on active duty. we don't want a stack of voter registration ballots sitting on a counter somewhere. we want them to physically go in and say whether they want to register or not. this is the only way we can track it and find out if it is sure apathy which i find hard to believe. or is it just not having access? host: there is a project called a military voter protection project and they compared 2008 ballot requests and 2012 ballot requests and looking at key states, they thought there was a great difference as far bell requests. do you believe there is a significant difference? guest: this is hor
that says, if we cut taxes, skew toward the wealthy, and roll back regulations we will be better off. i have a different view. i think we have to invest in education and training. i think it is important for us to develop new sources of energy here in america, that we change our tax code to make sure we are helping small businesses and companies here in the united states. that we take some of the money we are saving as we wind down two wars to rebuild america, and that we reduce our deficit in a way that makes us ablet -- that makes it able for us to create critical investments. it is up to you. are we going to go from the top down, which is what got us into this mess, or do we embrace the new economic patriotism that says america does best when the middle class does best? i'm looking forward to having that debate. >> governor romney. >> thank you, jim. i appreciate the chance to be with the president. appreciate the university of denver and their welcome. congratulations to you, mr. president, on your anniversary. i am sure this is the most dramatic place you could imagine, here with me. so
was surprising was how much time mitt romney spent on the defensive tonight over his $5 trillion tax cut for millionaires and billionaires. he can't explain the budget math. that tax cut for millionaires and billionaires -- neil: he said it's not $5 trillion by the way. here's my thought. i don't know who's right, by the way, but i have a question for you. how does that register back to average folks at home? is to, is not, is to, is not. does that leave folks confuse the like what the hell is this? >> well, you've seen the polling, the "wall street journal" nbc poll last week saying the american people side with the president on taxes, and they think it's crazy mitt romney is raising taxes on the middle class family with kids di $2,000 to pay for $5 trillion tax cuts on millionaires and billionaires. neil: well, he said that's not the case. i know where we go on this. do you think the president's blows were as many as romney's blow? i mention this because they go through, we'll give the president points on how he got -- how romneycare, it's a slippery slope, distinguishing it from the n
could be accurate or not. what is the person saying there should not be a millionaire tax or should be. who is the special interest dominating that message point coming out and how does the voter get through it? i think one the most amazing thicks happening in the country when you look at the president number heys doing well. what's fascinated about the amount of money being spent by the cross roads and the entity for some reason the message is not coming through it's not compel fpg you look at the swing states that we were going to be remarkably close are going to trend toward tbhawm a way that somebody thinks to seem unless the debate set the presidential election. it's clear the spt heading toward a environment he has a advantage. romney is going to be exceptional. >> tune in. >> fiewn in and watch. let watch. >> i'm excited. >> talk about in next week in class. >> would you taunt the cross road different and you engage in more localized races congressional and senate how you choose your priorities since so you have a broader scope. >> yeah. that's a good question. we're focused on
-taking that we get. and it's probably true that if we increase the tax rate we will get a rapid contraction in another risk taking but that is a compounding effect that can grow quite large overtime. in the same what if we stopped investing this year, it's not like economy would collapse. it will gradually slow down over time. and so higher payoffs for risk-taking, one is the they increase the bar for success. the united states most talented people work longer hours while their counterparts in europe and japan work fewer hours. the rest of the economy as people have grown richer they've had a reduction in the amount of work that they've done. so that's one of the things that's happened, keeping up with the joneses if you will. that work effort and the risk-taking that it represents creates companies like google and facebook in countless of other companies, innovations that we have enjoyed in the united states more than in europe and japan. and that creates valuable on the job training for our most talented workers. and so again you get the training and increases your probability for success
of the unemployed and the poor. that is where a flat tax comes in. it allows attraction of the capital abroad. sam nunn was correct, you have to cut government spending. that has to happen, especially entitlements where you pay people not to work. there are other ways of bringing the debt down. cool ones. for example, how about a federal state, local, tax amnesty program? there are a lot of people in the underground economy that would be brought above ground with amnesty program. i estimate a federal, state and local tax amnesty program would raise about $800 billion in 90 days. you can also sell some assets off. camped person -- camp pendleton is 500 square miles in california. why not sell it? >>neil: my point, when you say it is too big to handle, you are missing the point, you cannot cut $16 trillion debt but you can boom your way from it. we are losing sight and what bill clinton learned in 1993, 1994, if you present a plan that looks credible like you want to reverse the direction, sometimes that creates a boom in and of itself and inspires confidence in the market that has little confidence
trillion tax cut on top of 2 trillion for our military. and essaying that he is going to pay for it by closing loopholes and deductions. the problem is that he has been asked over 100 times how you would close those deductions and loopholes, and he hasn't been able to identify them. >> i'm not look for a $5 trillion a tax cut. what i have said is i won't put in place a tax cut that adds to the deficit. middle-income americans have seen their income come down by $4,300. this is a tax in and of itself. i'll call it the economy tax. it's been crushing. >> question. why did president obama seem thrown off balance? did he underestimate governor romney, pat buchanan? >> he certainly d. governor romney performed better on substance than any candidate in any presidential debate in history. reagan would have beaten him in style in 1980 but on substance i've never seen anybody better prepared than governor romney. he was on of fence. the real question, why did barack obama, the president, do so badly. john, he didn't come prepared for what he found there. he seemed difident, almost dis
a chance to explain what would happen to your taxes they were in charge. >> the question is not where we have been but where we are going. >> it's going to take a different path, not one x have been on, not the one the president described as a top down cut taxes for the rich. that not what i'm going to do. >> it's not possible to come up with enough loopholes for individuals to avoid raising the deficit or burdening the middle class. >> there will be no tax cut that adds to the deficit. >> i will take ideas from anybody, democrat or republican as long as they are advancing the cause of making middle class families stronger and giving opportunities to middle class. >> i have got five boys. i'm used to people saying something that not always true but repeating it hoping i will believe it. i will not reduce the taxes paid by high income americans. >> we do better when the middle class is doing well. by giving them those tax cuts they have more money in their pocket so maybe they can buy a new car. >> under the president's tax policies middle americans have been buried. they have been crushe
and a tax cut. that was done with the republican governor, is split between republicans and democrats in the house and senate. it was a bipartisan effort. we got it done for texas. road. been on the i really do not know. >> mr. sadler, a democrat has not won a statewide office in texas since 1994. do you consider this an uphill battle? >> for an open senate seat, it is always a battle, and should be, and needs to be, regardless of the party. i understand we have not elected a democrat in a long time. >> let's go to mr. cruz. he said the day after you beat lt. governor dewhurst, he said he would run scared for the general election. but you have agreed to this and what other debt -- televised debate. you criticized governor dewhurst for having almost 40 candidate forms up to the primary, but are you planning its eighth and coasting? safe and coasting? >> we have been crisscrossing the state of texas. we have been all over the state, literally hundreds of dop's and vfw halls and enny's talking with voters in every part of the state. that is what we are doing between now and election day.
week's debate, it's actually a plan to cut $5 billion in taxes, but he did it again tonight on cnn just a short time ago. the obama attacks are false, let's see what you think here. >> he ignores the fact that they're going to limit the deduction and -- he ignores that part. obviously that was corrected by the deputy campaign manager who stipulated the $5 trillion number was wrong. it's completely wrong. the combination of limiting deductions as well as growth of our economy will make up for the reduction in rate. >> bob shrum, thank got in the rest of this discussion with wolf blitzer, he clarified the fact he's going to cut $5 trillion in revenue, a lot of it from wealthy people. >>> he's not going to the bank, he's going to let that tax cut stand. you can call it a lie, he's cutting taxes for the rich. he says he's going to offset that, but when asked by wolf blitzer, are you going after where the money is, the mortgage deduction? rule going after charitable, which everybody seems to like? i'm not going to keep those preferences. how can he do it? is he houdini? >> he can't do it. th
and in this country, taxed more. if you tax small business, they are not going to hire. i don't know how you don't figure out what mr. romney so eloquently said in that debate. talking about politics of the 1% or the 47%, conservatives want the best for all folks, and yes, we mean thewe don't want them trapped in poverty. we want them married, paying their taxes -- host: we will get katrina vanden heuvel's response. guest: yeah. listen, if marriage will promote the well-being of the couple, children, great. but in my mind, it is and not just that. that is too simplistic. it is part of the equation. without good jobs, without ensuring that workers have rights and a time -- at the time when big business is so powerful, without doing small things that happened around this country but have taken too much effort, giving women, families early child care, the sense of a community coming together to lift up families, marriages not sufficient. to reduce it to that is too simplistic. no one is saying marriage isn't important. it is not the only a factor in building a family that is doing well. the fact th
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 182 (some duplicates have been removed)

Terms of Use (10 Mar 2001)